• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Autozone employee FIRED after defending store from armed robbery!!

Most stores tell employees to not fight back. They have insurance policies that cover theft, and it reduces the risk of the employee getting hurt.
 
Fuck AutoZone and their stupid corporate policies. This country is so back ass wards. Have guns for protection, but don't use them...way to go!
 
Completely disagree. Employees running to their cars to tote guns into the workplace to inflame a situation is no way to run a business. The counter jockeys are not trained with firearms and nobody wants to be in a situation where some asshole who subscribes to Soldier of Fortune sees a chance to get his name in the paper and gets the customers caught in a crossfire. Hand over the money calmly, get the guy out of the store with the least chance of some innocent bystander getting shot and then let the police handle it.
 
crashtestdummy said:
Most stores tell employees to not fight back. They have insurance policies that cover theft, and it reduces the risk of the employee getting hurt.
Click to expand...

He should have called 911 while he was outside, instead of going for his weapon.

But he shouldn't be fired for what he did.
 
Absolutely he needed to be canned. You don't see a guy like that as a liability? If it is his own property, sure let him defend it how he wants. But when you're being paid to do a job, you defend the property as the OWNER sees fit.
 
GagHalfrunt said:
Completely disagree. Employees running to their cars to tote guns into the workplace to inflame a situation is no way to run a business. The counter jockeys are not trained with firearms and nobody wants to be in a situation where some asshole who subscribes to Soldier of Fortune sees a chance to get his name in the paper and gets the customers caught in a crossfire. Hand over the money calmly, get the guy out of the store with the least chance of some innocent bystander getting shot and then let the police handle it.
Click to expand...

Tweak155 said:
Absolutely he needed to be canned. You don't see a guy like that as a liability? If it is his own property, sure let him defend it how he wants. But when you're being paid to do a job, you defend the property as the OWNER sees fit.
Click to expand...

+1 to both this as long as they had a policy in place that let the employees know what they should be doing and they shouldn't during a robbery.
 
Most businesses train employees as such. You don't antagonize a burglar, the most important thing is getting them out the door with nobody getting hurt as soon as possible.
 
Man C'mon.. That has to be one of the most panicked situations you can find yourself in. Life or death against an armed assailant. How many are going to be thinking "what would the company do?" in that type of situation? It was a hot moment and he reacted. The kid did what he thought was the right thing and considering the outcome it probably was.

This is what I hate about blanket policies - they never fit every situation.

So what if the kid broke the rules? He saved the store, and a criminal went down. Good for him. Better than 90% of the rest of us who would just tuck tail and run - or try to play nice. All things considered, maybe it's the policy that should be re-looked, not the kid who saved the day.

I glad the robber got put in his place by an armed citizen. He'll think twice before trying it again next time. Truth be told probably how the robber got so brazen in the first place because no one ever challenged him before. Just roll over and play nice for the guy with the gun.

This kid is a hero and should be commeneded for his bravery.. not shitcanned by his company.
 
Last edited:
People are so fucking stupid, reading those comments in the article. Everyone are talking about stop shopping at autozone and going to pepboys or blah blah. Haha. What are they going to do when PepBoy fires an employee for brandishing a firearm in their store as well. I agree that maybe they shouldn't have fired the guy given the circumstances, but they have policies like this in place to keep stupid litigation down.
 
Heroism has been renamed Vigilantism.

This employee is a rebel against a society that has attempted to train him to be passive since birth. This makes him a danger and a threat. He's lucky he's not in jail.
 
JoLLyRoGer said:
To say no good deed goes unpunished would be an understatment..
http://wtkr.com/2012/11/30/autozone-employee-fired-after-taking-action-against-fake-beard-bandit/

Man fsck Autozone! If that's how they take care of their own I'll never step foot in there again.

(Sorry if a repost - Sorry if it's P&N, but didn't figure it was political enough for that crowd)
Click to expand...

standard policy at pretty much every retail do not interfere, comply and let them have what they want and then call the police..
the are insured and don't want to risk the employee getting hurt and then getting sued by that employee or family if the robber shoots beats or kills them.

this is in the standard handbook when you are hired on at retail places.
 
I'm sure if this employee accidentally shot/injured a customer, people would have been fine as it's part of the cost of stopping the crime.
 
Good corporate policy. Bad PR. All they can do is hope the noise dies down. The company should not hire him back.
 
Don't think he should get fired, but I don't think the employee should have tried to stop the burglar either.
 
Capt Caveman said:
I'm sure if this employee accidentally shot/injured a customer, people would have been fine as it's part of the cost of stopping the crime.
Click to expand...

lol the customer would be suing Autozone, which would cost a helluva lot more than whatever a robber could steal in a stickup at an auto parts store.
 
Dari said:
Good corporate policy. Bad PR. All they can do is hope the noise dies down. The company should not hire him back.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this. I think the guy acted bravely, but the company cannot afford to tolerate employees taking the law into their own hands this way. The clerk's actions dramatically increased the risk that this robbery would escalate into a gunfight in which someone (be it the robber, the clerk or a third party, perhaps a customer) was hurt or killed. If the company does nothing to the clerk and another employee does the same thing, leading to a large, deadly shootout, Autozone will be sued into the ground.
 
JoLLyRoGer said:
Man C'mon.. That has to be one of the most panicked situations you can find yourself in. Life or death against an armed assailant. How many are going to be thinking "what would the company do?" in that type of situation? It was a hot moment and he reacted. The kid did what he thought was the right thing and considering the outcome it probably was.

This is what I hate about blanket policies - they never fit every situation.

So what if the kid broke the rules? He saved the store, and a criminal went down. Good for him. Better than 90% of the rest of us who would just tuck tail and run - or try to play nice. All things considered, maybe it's the policy that should be re-looked, not the kid who saved the day.

I glad the robber got put in his place by an armed citizen. He'll think twice before trying it again next time. Truth be told probably how the robber got so brazen in the first place because no one ever challenged him before. Just roll over and play nice for the guy with the gun.

This kid is a hero and should be commeneded for his bravery.. not shitcanned by his company.
Click to expand...

I don't think the question is whether what he did was right or wrong - but whether or not what he did was against the store's policy for its workers (which it was).

Everyone takes responsibility in these types of situation. The worker now takes responsibility for HIS actions. If he felt that the guy needed to be chased off with a weapon, he should do it knowing he is risking his job. I don't see the problem here.

If some guy was coming at me with a gun and I was at work and I myself had a weapon, would I be ok with losing my job to defend myself? Heck yes.

At the same time allowing your workers to use a weapon puts responsibility on you as the company. This is just bad business.

There is no issue here, everything was done as it should be. That guy should have done it even if he knew for a fact he'd lose his job. And this is what he did, intentionally or not.
 
JoLLyRoGer said:
Man C'mon.. That has to be one of the most panicked situations you can find yourself in. Life or death against an armed assailant. How many are going to be thinking "what would the company do?" in that type of situation? It was a hot moment and he reacted. The kid did what he thought was the right thing and considering the outcome it probably was.

This is what I hate about blanket policies - they never fit every situation.

So what if the kid broke the rules? He saved the store, and a criminal went down. Good for him. Better than 90% of the rest of us who would just tuck tail and run - or try to play nice. All things considered, maybe it's the policy that should be re-looked, not the kid who saved the day.

I glad the robber got put in his place by an armed citizen. He'll think twice before trying it again next time. Truth be told probably how the robber got so brazen in the first place because no one ever challenged him before. Just roll over and play nice for the guy with the gun.

This kid is a hero and should be commeneded for his bravery.. not shitcanned by his company.
Click to expand...

I could not agree more.
Most people would react that way in the face of danger and your friends and co-workers in harms way.
 
CraigRT said:
I could not agree more.
Most people would react that way in the face of danger and your friends and co-workers in harms way.
Click to expand...

It's easy to agree when the situation turned out favorably.

I'm sure you'd all call this guy a moron if the robber lit up the place.
 
KLin said:
lol the customer would be suing Autozone, which would cost a helluva lot more than whatever a robber could steal in a stickup at an auto parts store.
Click to expand...

Ok, I get it.. the policy is in place to prevent exactly this scenario. But that wasn't how it went down.

Now, I've got another one for you. Corporate policies and handbooks aside (or in place - either way doesn't matter). You're working the counter and in walks an armed robber. You don't know this guys's intentions. You can argue he's just there for the money, but you don't KNOW that. You automatically have to assume that here stands a man with a gun and bad intentions who intends to do me harm up to and potentially including my life.

Are you really going to tell me that you're not going to try and defend yourself by any means available toyou in a life or death situaion (and being confronted by a man with a weapon you must automatically assume it is)? Are you really that much of a lemming just because it's printed in some corporate handbook?

And in the case of the Autozone employee.. I say no harm done, no foul. Thanks for your bravery. Here's free car parts for life and a nice Christmas bonus. Now go take the wife out to dinner and get something nice for the kids.
 
Last edited:
Dari said:
Good corporate policy. Bad PR. All they can do is hope the noise dies down. The company should not hire him back.
Click to expand...

Really bad PR. The company has just announced that any robber will get paid, and employees will not resist. This puts all employees in danger.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top